That’s right, “colored people.”
If you’re like me, “colored people” brings back unpleasant memories of the era of Jim Crow, racially segregated bathrooms, and lynching. The term “colored” was used as an obvious opposite to “white” and that group's declared superiority. Just try referring to African-Americans as “colored” in public today and you’re likely to hear complaints from at least one party. It’s just not done. It’s outdated and unacceptable- and for good reason.
The National Association for the Advancement of COLORED People claims part of their mission is to, “promote equality of rights and to eradicate caste or race prejudice among the citizens of the United States” and "to advance the interests of colored persons." They not only use that offensive word in their mission statement, but also as part of their organization's name!
Does referring to African Americans as “colored” help or hinder with this stated goal?
The National Association for the Advancement of COLORED People is fully involved in the recent purge of Confederate flags in the south.
Recently, an “activist” climbed a flag pole at the South Carolina State Capitol and removed the Confederate flag. In a statement on its website the group's president, Cornell William Brooks, included this gem in his support of the “activist’s" action:
“The NAACP stands with our youth and behind the multigenerational band of activists fighting the substance and symbols of bigotry, hatred and intolerance.”
Apparently, Mr. Brooks fails to see the “bigotry, hatred and intolerance” of still using, in this day and age, the term “colored people” to refer to African-Americans.
In Dallas, the cultural purge is soon expanding to the removal of confederate monuments. The National Association for the Advancement of COLORED People, “will meet next week to talk about Confederate landmarks in North Texas and decide which ones they will push to have removed.”
"If we are going to move forward in America, as Americans, we have to let go of those symbols," says Arthur Fleming, President of the Dallas chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of COLORED People.
Perhaps Mr. Fleming should first look in his own back yard for such symbols. Like his organization’s name! Using racist terms to describe the people you claim to care about is not a good way to “move forward in America.” How can you “move forward” if you still use unacceptable language from the past? How can anyone even take you seriously?
"We're in a period of time when we can change some things," continues Mr. Fleming.
Agreed, Mr. Fleming! You can start such necessary “change” by changing your name!
"Just says certain things have not changed," Fleming said of his thoughts when he sees a Confederate monument. "That's what it means to us."
People of reason and logic, who can spot a race hustling hypocrite from a mile away, agree with you, Mr. Fleming. “Certain things” have not changed. Some continue to use racist language from the past while supposedly working for a racism-free future. That's what your hypocrisy "means to us."
NAACP supporters may argue their organization should not change its name because of its historical significance. Yet, they refuse to accept such reasoning offered by others defending flags and monuments that have historical significance to them.
Too many people continue to bow and scrape to such hypocritical and arrogant attitudes. Too many people still consider such shakedowns (both cultural and financial) as sincere pleas for change, rather then accept the reality of their authoritarian, culturally insensitive, and yes, racist nature. And not enough people are willing to expose the otherwise obvious hypocrisy hiding behind apparent good intentions.
Cultural cleansing and dogmatism, as shown by Mr. Brooks and Mr. Fleming, has preceded many murderous, totalitarian campaigns in the past. Here’s hoping that these gentlemen’s obvious hypocrisy is a roadblock to their absurd and potentially dangerous enterprise.
